Earlier research on multi-party negotiation has investigated two decision rules, unanimity and majority, yet has hitherto ignored another one: the dictator decision-making rule, where one person has the final say. We address this research void by investigating how ‘dictators’ use their power in multi-party negotiations. We predicted power to amplify the established effects that cooperative negotiators reach more integrative agreements than individualistic ones. Furthermore, we explored the role of (subordinate) trust and dictator-structuring behavior. A face-to-face role- play negotiation study using our "Aloha Beach Club" paradigm wase conducted with three- person groups sampled from the general population (N = 297) and compared individualistically or cooperatively motivated groups with or without a dictator. Cooperative dictator-groups reached the highest joint outcomes, while individualistically motivated leaders increased their own outcomes by exploiting their subordinates.
